Thread Tools

Looking at the units on both sides of the ball, and defining "upside" as:

1. everyone has a good year (as defined by their past)
2. no significant injuries, and speedy recovery from last year's
3. the young players (2nd and 3rd years) have a reasonable jump in performance from last year
4. high potential rookies make a contribution

The way I look at this team is the same as last year without the bad apples. If you subtract the 4th quarter meltdowns from last year you will have the team this year.

Click to expand...

I think you're being a little conservative.

- We had a big rookie class last year, they should be better this year as they aren't rookies any more.

- Although Gronk is a rookie, the combination of Crump and Gronk has to be better than the Watson/Baker pairing, especially blocking.

- Holt has to be an upgrade over Aiken. And in the unlikely event Holt is done, we have good options like Tate, Edelman (when Welker returns) and Price, one of which, again, has to be better than Aiken.

- Although you can't count on rookies we look like we have an exceptional class and with 4 of those picks in the first two rounds we just have more chances at a good contributor than most teams do.

The fly in the ointment, of course, is when and how well Welker returns.

- We had a big rookie class last year, they should be better this year as they aren't rookies any more.

- Although Gronk is a rookie, the combination of Crump and Gronk has to be better than the Watson/Baker pairing, especially blocking.

- Holt has to be an upgrade over Aiken. And in the unlikely event Holt is done, we have good options like Tate, Edelman (when Welker returns) and Price, one of which, again, has to be better than Aiken.

- Although you can't count on rookies we look like we have an exceptional class and with 4 of those picks in the first two rounds we just have more chances at a good contributor than most teams do.

The fly in the ointment, of course, is when and how well Welker returns.

Click to expand...

Don't forget Hernandez. I believe he'll make an impact in the receiving game quicker than Price or Tate.

Don't forget Hernandez. I believe he'll make an impact in the receiving game quicker than Price or Tate.

Click to expand...

He could well - and I truly think he'd be an upgrade over Aiken as a WR if it came to that. More likely, though, Holt will do fine and Hernandez will be a lesser role player IMO. I expect Crump and Gronk to be a brutal (in a good way) combination in some matchups - READ : WEEK 2 VS. The Jets.

All of a sudden it looks like we're back to tons of interesting options. Last year our #3 WR couldn't play and all our TE were mediocre. Now we have a real #3 WR, three young developmental ones (Edelman, Price, Tate), two classic TE and one move TE who could easily be a Dallas Clark type.

I know, cut out the exuberance over all these new unproven guys; but these are actual, real talents unlike the likes of Aiken and Baker. Tate is the interesting guy, everyone with the Pats who is asked mentions how much they like him.

I'm expecting to see Hernandez a good amount Week 1 vs. the Bengals, btw, then for the offense to morph to two huge blocking TE Week 2; the best way to stop the Jets pass rush will be to put Crump and Gronk in there to gash the defense vs. the run and also provide extra OL when pass blocking.

- We had a big rookie class last year, they should be better this year as they aren't rookies any more.

- Although Gronk is a rookie, the combination of Crump and Gronk has to be better than the Watson/Baker pairing, especially blocking.

- Holt has to be an upgrade over Aiken. And in the unlikely event Holt is done, we have good options like Tate, Edelman (when Welker returns) and Price, one of which, again, has to be better than Aiken.

- Although you can't count on rookies we look like we have an exceptional class and with 4 of those picks in the first two rounds we just have more chances at a good contributor than most teams do.

The fly in the ointment, of course, is when and how well Welker returns.

Click to expand...

Agree. I still don't believe when people in this board has the same quality than last year. Even without Welker(which will be back by, at least the middle of the year), this WR corps are so much better. I'm so anxious to see Tate, cause everybady in the Pats seems to love him. When Welker is back, he'll(Tate) be the number 3 reciever, putting Holt as the 4th reciever, now tell me how's that not a HUGE upgrade, even with Edelman as the slot reciever.

Belichick and Brady and all the leaders on the team know they need to get back to being the tough underdogs who recognize that each player on the roster has a role to play and is committed to performing that role to his highest ability.

In doing so the sum of the whole is more than that of the parts.

Belichick is going out of his way to bring back the gritty attitude that's been lost in the last 2 years or so.

They know this is a winning formula - Torry Holt can attest to that for the guys in the locker room who don't remember.

I think the biggest factor by far is that Brady is completely recovered from his injuries. It takes two years to fully bounce back from ACL surgery. The first one is physical and the second is mental. Everyone is bemoaning our lack of pass-rushing, or defensive aggressiveness, but we had a very uncharacteristic lapse in the one thing we have been known for doing in the BB era: holding on to a lead in the 2nd half.

I think the biggest factor by far is that Brady is completely recovered from his injuries. It takes two years to fully bounce back from ACL surgery. The first one is physical and the second is mental. Everyone is bemoaning our lack of pass-rushing, or defensive aggressiveness, but we had a very uncharacteristic lapse in the one thing we have been known for doing in the BB era: holding on to a lead in the 2nd half.

I believe that that was the difference between 10-6 and 13-3.

Click to expand...

Thats a huge factor, that no one is counting, that and the growing up of our defense.

I feel like Edelman showed a lot of potential last year. Is it possible that he will see a decent amount of playing time when Welker comes back? He might even end up being better than Tate. I'd start Edelman over Tate because he's actually shown SOMETHING, not that I don't believe in Tate or anything.

You can't top the WR corp from 2007. Besides having loads of talent, they really came out and took everyone by surprise.

The way I look at this team is the same as last year without the bad apples. If you subtract the 4th quarter meltdowns from last year you will have the team this year.

Click to expand...

If you take away the 4th quarter meltdowns we're a 14-2 team (13-3 if you count the first Bills game as a L, since that was a meltdown on their part). But I'd still take that. Question is will a no longer rusty Tom Brady, Torry Holt and the new TE's solve the offensive 2nd half woes and make that difference. I already think the defense will be improved even without significant new contributions. Each player has one more year under their belt and Mayo will hopefully be full strength, plus BB is taking the reigns.

If you take away the 4th quarter meltdowns we're a 14-2 team (13-3 if you count the first Bills game as a L, since that was a meltdown on their part). But I'd still take that. Question is will a no longer rusty Tom Brady, Torry Holt and the new TE's solve the offensive 2nd half woes and make that difference. I already think the defense will be improved even without significant new contributions. Each player has one more year under their belt and Mayo will hopefully be full strength, plus BB is taking the reigns.

Click to expand...

I love this argument: "if you take away".

If you "take away" Manning's game ending int, he had a really good game in the sb! If you "take away" Mark Sanchez's int's during the regular season and focus on what he did in the playoffs, he had a really good year, too!!!

We were never a 14-2 team, and changing out the things you mentioned does not mean we will be a 14-2 team next year, because if we were trully a 14-2 team, you wouldnt have to "take away" the thing(s) that made us a 10-6 team.